Howard had the better raw numbers obviously but Garnett's plus/minus have remained off the charts. When all is said and done, who would you rather have in the middle if you knew you weren't winning games unless you conceded underneath x points?

AdamTheGreek wrote:Dwight made Hedo and Jameer look like respectable defenders.

KG did the same for Paul Pierce who wasn't known for defense before that time.

What happened in Minny?

Mind you, KG doesn't deserve all the blame for mediocre teammates, but he also doesn't deserve all the credit for better teammates/team structure.

Around here KG is seen as Job in Minny and Jesus in Boston. Ridiculous.

Again, the DRTG stat is blaring. Funny how ORTG is proof of Nash as the "offensive GOAT" (beyond parody, or perhaps beneath it) but KG's middling impact on DRTG during his prime and peak go unmentioned in thread after thread by posters who pimp for both players. Political talking points 101.

Well... if you take Offensive APM for Nash (sorry for the sidebar, Your Honor), the AVERAGE rotation player he worked with (20mpg or more) was running at +0.6. Reasonable, but not outstanding. His peak year for offensive assistance was 2007, with an average +1.5, with the low being (pretty obviously given Amare's absence) the previous year where his teammates were basically neutral on O (slight negative).

Bringing it back to Garnett, his average defensive teammate in 03 was running at just under -1 wheras the following year at +0.5.

Now as always, APM basically works at how well a player fits their role, and each key player will obviously be the player who is the fulcrum of each team role (and therefore the major beneficiary in an APM sense). However, I wouldn't have thought you could infer from that that either player had a world-beating supporting cast.

ElGee wrote:You, my friend, have shoved those words into my mouth, which is OK because I'm hungry.

rrravenred wrote:Well... if you take Offensive APM for Nash (sorry for the sidebar, Your Honor), the AVERAGE rotation player he worked with (20mpg or more) was running at +0.6. Reasonable, but not outstanding. His peak year for offensive assistance was 2007, with an average +1.5, with the low being (pretty obviously given Amare's absence) the previous year where his teammates were basically neutral on O (slight negative).

Bringing it back to Garnett, his average defensive teammate in 03 was running at just under -1 wheras the following year at +0.5.

How does any of this undermine the point about this board's hypocrisy over Nash+ORTG versus Garnett-DRTG?

A very, very curious point coming from people that so often claim to be dispassionately predisposed to those stats, yet only seem interested in them when it supports their favored players.

Either these stats are reliable or they are not, If they aren't -- which I very much agree with -- then much of the meme for Nash around here is automatically undone.

It appears that you're attempting to talk around this issue rather than replying to it.

However, I wouldn't have thought you could infer from that that either player had a world-beating supporting cast.

Speaking of inference, it's rather ironic here since you're the one pretending an argument was made that, simply, wasn't -- if you can find where I said that Garnett had world-beating teammates (for most of his run in Minny) in that post I'll be very impressed.

Logically, if teammates are to blame for Garnett's DRTG troubles, then they should, likewise, be praised when the number moves in the right direction in Boston. Yet that's not the case on RealGM.

However, it does return to the general meme of this board: the teammates are always to blame in regards to any failure -- stat-wise or otherwise -- while any triumph is due to Garnett, "the best defensive player of his generation!!!" or Steve Nash, "offensive G.O.A.T.". So if nothing else, you're staying on point -- as far as general board rhetoric -- while missing it here, willfully or otherwise.

In other words, when it comes time to ignore an inconvenient stat, or at least scapegoat from it -- like Garnett's record with team DRTG while an ostensible alpha -- the teammates are a big deal, yet they are only lucky to have Garnett's (or Nash's) presence when the stat shows something distinctly positive.

Again, the most striking aspect around here is how liberally and subjectively certain stats are thrown around or simply thrown out, depending on whether they support the favored player or rule against him.

That's the point in bringing up teammates in regards to Garnett. I hope I'm understood.

FWIW, I don't think anyone has particularly downplayed the effect of Tom Thibodeau especially at Boston (Pierce and Rondo both reasonably good defenders, as was Perk).

Feel free to label it as special pleading arguments if you like, but I DO think a PG is capable of singlehandedly impacting offense more than a PF/C is capable of singlehandedly impacting defense (a concept SOMEWHAT backed up by a casual reading of APM). It's interesting to look at someone like Mutombo, for example, who helmed some pretty poor defensive squads by Drtg, as well as some fantastic ones. He's a very different type of defender, of course, so it's not a perfect parallel.

W.R.T. the issue of Ortg and Drtg, you can absolutely read that as a blemish on KG's resume and compare it unfavourably with someone like Duncan (who I'd still argue had a more complementary defensive cast and coaching squad with which to work).

Also, if you really want to accuse me directly of hypocrisy, then I suggest you find evidence demonstrating that I have made the strawmannish argument you've put forward. You're taking a very confrontational line here and I was actually trying to bring a bit of light to the subject, rather than just raising the temperature.

ElGee wrote:You, my friend, have shoved those words into my mouth, which is OK because I'm hungry.